This is a Christian blog dealing with various issues. “Discernment is not simply a matter of telling the difference between what is right and wrong; rather it is the difference between right and almost right.” -Charles Spurgeon. Scripture is my authority for all things regarding to life and godliness. 2 Cor. 10: 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

I’ve said for a while now that Piper is a cancer in his defiant defense of X-rated Driscoll, Paul Cussing Tripp, and heretic Douglas Wilson.

Its been reported that Desiring God will invite Tricky Ricky Warren to speak at their conference this year.

Don't defend this by claiming Warren might learn something. Oh, no. Warren doesn’t go anywhere to learn, but to teach and lure people away from the Truth. False teachers are not to be welcomed into a church nor offered in any way to the sheep. And the sheep are NOT to be the play yard for the wolves to see the light! But hardly anyone cared when Piper offered Tripp or Wilson. After all, they have some truth, right? About as much as a Mormon, Roman Catholic, Buddhist, Muslim or Oneness Pentecostal.

At what point is anyone will to totally reject a man, a ministry, a church, a group? What would it take to do so?Pardon me, I'm assuming there are those who would actually do so, given the evidence. Perhaps no one IS willing to foresake all for Christ Jesus anymore. I can count on ONE HAND those that DO.

Most professing Christians including Reformers, have been duped into beliving "truth is in everything" which allows them to not ever totally reject a man, a ministry, a book, a church. They think that by swallowing the poison they are still getting water that will help the body. These are the same that think the RCC is valid on some level, that Luther taught grace alone (you ought to read his 95 Theses as well as his larger catechism if you believe that), or that C.S. Lewis was a Christian, much less an Evangelical. In short, Christians---even many who hold to the Doctrines of Grace (and I love the doctrines of grace) think in practicle terms, biblical doctrine really is optional. That's why they can read the above authors. Apparently there is another way of justification by faith alone and salvation by faith alone. Apparently the Lord didn't mean it when He said that those who bring a false gospel are condemned. Apparently Paul was wrong when he said that if you add works to grace, grace is no longer grace.

So when Piper offered other false and unqualified men to speak at the DG conference, it was no wonder it was considered merely interestingly entertaining, as this lastest scandal is. To fain shock or surprise is to continue to miss the ONGOING problem with Piper. But I suppose, as long as one calls himself a Christian or claims TULIP, they will not be turned away. Ever.

So how do they think false teachers “secretly sneak in among you”? Or do you think that just can't happen in your circles? Will they announce themselves? No they won’t. They disguise themselves cleverly as a fellow sheep and often as shepherds—until they’ve slaughtered the sheep. That’s why God commands us to be “extreme” when it comes to such things: separate completely from poisonous men. This isn’t a sandbox we’re playing in. We’re engaged in a WAR. A war for Truth.

1John 2:21.. NO LIE IS OF THE TRUTH.

Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. 10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.

2Jo 1:9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, 11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.

Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. 18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

Also, please consider 2Cor. 6:14-18.

I can only pray God will open up the eyes of His children and give them grace to stand loyal to Christ and Christ alone. As you can tell, this has burdened my heart for quite some time. I’d like to suggest an excellent article on the topic of taking heed to what you read (since so many love Piper’s books), by A.W. Pink. I hope it will strike a chord with someone and challenge many to reconsider their compromise.

Monday, March 29, 2010

I'm not sure what's going on here. It sounds noble, but there are some serious problems with Piper I've shared here over the years (a search of "Piper" will bring up previous articles I've written with documentation).

In summary, here is what has grieved me over the years. Piper has consistantly and unashamedly defended and offered X-Rated Cussing Pastor Mark Driscoll as well as Paul Trip (big on using the “s” word in the promotional video for DG conference this past year). MacArthur called him publically to task for this very thing. His response was defiance.

He has also offered Doug Wilson–a flat out heretic devoted to spreading the false gospel of Federal Vision heresy (“The Federal Vision brazenly defends justification by works; universal covenant grace to every child of believing parents, if not to every person sprinkled with water in the name of the triune God; an election unto grace that fails to save; baptismal regeneration; and the falling away of many who were once united to Christ”–Trinity Foundation).

He also is instrumental in advocating Reformemergents (my word for combining Reformed theology to the Emergent Church Movement) like Driscoll, Chandler, and Keller.

" In 30 years, I have never let go of the passion for public productivity. In this leave, I intend to let go of all of it. No book-writing. No sermon preparation or preaching. No blogging. No Twitter. No articles. No reports. No papers. And no speaking engagements. There is one stateside exception—the weekend devoted to the Desiring God National Conferencecombined with the inaugural convocation of Bethlehem College and Seminary in October. Noël thought I should keep three international commitments. Our reasoning is that if she could go along, and if we plan it right, these could be very special times of refreshment together."

So is it three events he's attending or one combo? And why is Noel seeming to dictate he should go, if doing all these types of events was a problem to begin with? I'm not following the logic here. The fact that he isn't "letting it all go" but still attending to a few public engagements seems to me that he can't give it all up. He has to keep his finger in the pie. Does he think he's that indespensible? Either let it "all" go or don't call it a leave of absence.

Working on his marriage is a good thing, no doubt. But Piper's lack of discernment, wisdom, and unteachablity when confronted with his consistant defense of Driscoll shows a far deeper problem. One that time won't help, but a truly teachable heart, humbled by God, will. Compromise of Truth for relationships isn't an option. I hope he learns that.

The worship conference is presented by Worship Leader magazine, whose chief editor is Chuck Fromm (Chuck Smith, Sr.’s nephew). On the conference website, a banner promotion by Greg Laurie, (another veteran Calvary Chapel pastor) sits in a prominent spot. Laurie states: “In Worship Leader magazine, you hear from the leading thinkers, artists, and pastors on how we can more effectively worship God.”

With general promotion of Worship Leader magazine by someone as popular as Greg Laurie, and with the conference taking place at one of the larger Calvary Chapel churches, undoubtedly, the event will be accepted by many Christians as a credible, trustworthy conference. But Leonard Sweet’s involvement should cause serious concern for believers.

By the way, Chris Tomlin and Keith & Kristyn Getty will be sharing the platform with them, as well as a few women "pastors" , and various Willow Creek leaders or former leaders. Interstingly, there's a woman described as the "executive producer" at a church who "oversees all aspects of Sunday services". Executive Producer? Yup, nothing but an entertainment hour for them.

Friday, March 26, 2010

Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed! A man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions." Luke 12:15 "Few people think of the danger of getting rich.Most think that they become great--just in proportion as they gather wealth. Yet there never was a more fatal error! A man is really measured by what he IS--not by what he HAS. We may find a shriveled soul in the midst of a great fortune; and a noble soul in the barest poverty. A man's real "life" is what would be left of him--if everything he has were stripped off. His real 'worth' is his character, as it appears in God's sight.We will make a great mistake if our goal in life--is simply to gather more worldly trinkets than our neighbor!" (J. R. Miller, "Counsel and Help" 1907)"

I think the same can be said for churches. They think the bigger, the greater "for God's kingdom"; or the bigger the more anointed by God. God's blessing on a church is defined by most evangelicals is the SIZE of the congregation, not its spiritual condition. This isn't restricted to the typical Purpose-Driven churches either....I've witnessed it within "solid" circles and with missionaries as well.

Its pathetic.

So while exhorting individuals to not fall into the trap of loving money or having money define them personally, they as a church define God's blessing by money coming in and numbers. And if you doubt that, ask pastors who will tell you (if they are honest) that's what is the number one question asked at these pastor conferences ("what's the size of your church?").

I think I'll insert "church" for individuals

"Few churches think of the danger of getting rich. Most think that they become great--just in proportion as they gather wealth. Yet there never was a more fatal error! A church is really measured by what it IS--not by what it HAS. We may find a shriveled soul in the midst of a great fortune; and a noble soul in the barest poverty. A church's real "life" is what would be left of it--if everything it has were stripped off. It's real 'worth' is its character, as it appears in God's sight.We will make a great mistake if our goal in church--is simply to gather more worldly trinkets than our neighbor!"

Now do you see what I mean?

Give me a church of a faithful 50 than a lukewarm church of 500 any day.

Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. 10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.

This is a growing trend among "Evangelicals" including "Reformers". John Piper offered Douglas Wilson, a proponent of a similar view called "Federal Vision". I discuss that here.

Here's the issue that I keep seeing among "pastors": truth is in everything. This explains why its so impossible for pastors to totally reject a teacher, a book, a movement, a church, a ministry when it fails the test of Scripture.

How many Gospels are there?How many ways of justification?

There is but ONE Gospel and ONE way of justification. Any other is false and damnable, according to Gal. 1.

It seems that most Reformers, most Evangelicals, think the Roman Catholic Church is valid on some level which is why they continue to not only buy into its fathers and history, but now they are buying into its backdoor false gospel that will appeal to foolish and fleshly "evangelicals" in order to reign them into the "invisible church" (aka Rome). Some have already signed on via the ETC and the Manhattan Declaration. Is this a surprise?

When will Christians wake up to the fact that its not only biblical, but its right, proper, loving, and necessary to separate from false teachers completely? Giving poisonous water to the sheep is not good, its horrific and deathly and unloving! In some cases, as with these men who preach a FALSE GOSPEL its damnable. We aren't talking about ignorance here. We're talking rebellion of pastors to the command to let NO ONE IN who does NOT abide in the teaching of Jesus Christ.

Is not Jesus the Lord? Why do you call Him "Lord, Lord" yet not do what HE has commanded?

2Jo 1:9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

2Jo 1:10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, 11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.

Rom. 16: ﻿17﻿ I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. ﻿18﻿ For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.

2 Tim. 2: ﻿16﻿ Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly. 2Tim 2: ﻿17﻿ Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, ﻿18﻿ who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.

2Tim. 4: ﻿14﻿ Alexander the metalworker did me a great deal of harm. The Lord will repay him for what he has done. ﻿15﻿ You too should be on your guard against him, because he strongly opposed our message.2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? 15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

The great majority of those who read this will, doubtless, be they who profess to be in possession of a saving faith. To all such we would put the questions. Where is your proof? What effects has it produced in you? A tree is known by its fruits, and a fountain by the waters which issue from it; so the nature of your faith may be ascertained by a careful examination of what it is bringing forth. We say "a careful examination," for as all fruit is not fit for eating nor all water for drinking, so all works are not the effects of a faith which saves. Reformation is not regeneration, and a changed life does not always indicate a changed heart. Have you been saved from a dislike of God’s commandments and a disrelish of His holiness? Have you been saved from pride, covetousness, murmuring? Have you been delivered from the love of this world, from the fear of man, from the reigning power of every sin?

The heart of fallen man is thoroughly depraved, its thoughts and imaginations being only evil continually (Gen. 6:5). It is full of corrupt desires and affections, which exert themselves and influence man in all he does. Now the Gospel comes into direct opposition with these selfish lusts and corrupt affections, both in the root and in the fruit of them (Titus 2:11, 12). There is no greater duty that the Gospel urges upon our souls than the mortifying and destroying of them, and this indispensably, if we intend to be made partakers of its promises (Romans 8:13; Col. 3:5, 8). Hence the first real work of faith is to cleanse the soul from these pollutions, and therefore we read, "They that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts" (Gal. 5:24). Mark well, it is not that they "ought to" do so, but that they have actually, in some measure or degree.

Likewise, to believe there is a hell and yet run unto it; to believe that sin continued in will damn and yet live in it—to what purpose is it to boast of such a faith? Now, from what was before us in the above section, it should be plain beyond all room for doubt that when God imparts saving faith to a soul radical and real effects will follow. One cannot be raised from the dead without there being a consequent walking in newness of life. One cannot be the subject of a miracle of grace being wrought in the heart without a noticeable change being apparent to all who know him.

Salvation is twofold: it is both legal and experimental, and consists of justification and sanctification.Moreover, I owe my salvation not only to the Son but to all three persons in the Godhead. Alas, how little is this realized today, and how little is it preached.

...Thirdly and efficaciously I owe my salvation to the regenerating, sanctifying and preserving operations of the Spirit: note that His work is made just as prominent in Luke 15:8-10, as is the Shepherd’s in Luke 15:4-7! As Titus 3:5, so plainly affirms, God "saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit"; and it is the presence of His "fruit" in my heart and life which furnishes the immediate evidence of my salvation.

Saving faith is ever accompanied by an obedient walk. "Hereby we do know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He that saith, I know Him, and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him" (1 John 2:3, 4). Make no mistake upon this point: infinite as are the merits of Christ’s sacrifice, mighty as is the potency of His priestly intercession, yet they avail not for any who continue in the path of disobedience. He acknowledges none to be His disciples save them who do homage to Him as their Lord. "Too many professors pacify themselves with the idea that they possess imputed righteousness, while they are indifferent to the sanctifying work of the Spirit. They refuse to put on the garment of obedience, they reject the white linen which is the righteousness of the saints. They thus reveal their self-will, their enmity to God, and their non-submission to His Son. Such men may talk what they will about justification by faith, and salvation by grace, but they are rebels at heart; they have not on the wedding-dress any more than the self-righteous, whom they so eagerly condemn. The fact is, if we wish for the blessings of grace, we must in our hearts submit to the rules of grace without picking and choosing" (C. H. Spurgeon on "The Wedding Garment").

Alas, that so very few of those now bearing the name of Christ have any real experimental acquaintance with these things. Alas, that so many are deceived by a faith which is not a saving one. "He only is a Christian who lives for Christ. Many persons think they can be Christians on easier terms than these. They think it is enough to trust in Christ while they do not live for Him. But the Bible teaches us that if we are partakers of Christ’s death we are also partakers of His life. If we have any such appreciation of His love in dying for us as to lead us to confide in the merits of His death, we shall be constrained to consecrate our lives to His service.And this is the only evidence of the genuineness of our faith" (Charles Hodge on 2 Corinthians 5:15). Reader, are the things mentioned above actualized in your own experience? If they are not, how worthless and wicked is your profession!

"First of all, then we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama," Sharpton said. "Let's not act as though the president didn't tell the American people - the president offered the American people health reform when he ran. He was overwhelmingly elected running on that and he has delivered what he promised."

Deny Jesus is the only way of salvation, deny the preaching of the Gospel necessary to be saved, deny justification by faith, deny the ONLY name under heaven by which we must be saved, and hey, you can still be a Christian...and quoted as such from the pulpits!

"There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (although he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points. Many of the good Pagans long before Christ’s birth may have been in this position…Consequently it is not much use trying to make judgments about Christians and non-Christians in the mass’." On page 173 of ‘Mere Christianity’ C S Lewis.

"Well, Christianity and being a true believer--you know, I think there's the Body of Christ. This comes from all the Christian groups around the world, outside the Christian groups. I think everybody that loves Christ, or knows Christ, whether they're conscious of it or not, they're members of the Body of Christ. And I don't think that we're going to see a great sweeping revival, that will turn the whole world to Christ at any time. I think James answered that, the Apostle James in the first council in Jerusalem, when he said that God's purpose for this age is to call out a people for His name. And that's what God is doing today, He's calling people out of the world for His name, whether they come from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world, or the Christian world or the non-believing world, they are members of the Body of Christ because they've been called by God. They may not even know the name of Jesus but they know in their hearts that they need something that they don't have, and they turn to the only light that they have, and I think that they are saved, and that they're going to be with us in heaven....I've met people in various parts of the world in tribal situations, that they have never seen a Bible or heard about a Bible, and never heard of Jesus, but they've believed in their hearts that there was a God, and they've tried to live a life that was quite apart from the surrounding community in which they lived." - Billy Graham on Robert Schuller's show

Roman Catholic Catechism #847 "Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation."

Scripture says the above is condemned!

Rom 10:13 For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." 14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!"

1Co 15:1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you--unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,

1Co 2:1 And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. 2 For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

Act 4:11 This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. 12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

Rom 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame."

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

"Christian Hedonism" was a term Piper made popular in his "Desiring God" book.

Hedonism:

"HEDONE was the spirit (daimona) of pleasure, enjoyment and delight. As a daughter of Eros (Love) she was associated more specifically with sensual pleasure. Her opposite number were the Algea (Pains). The Romans named her Voluptas."

Marry a word with that history and connotation to "Christian" and what do you get?

Saturday, March 13, 2010

John Piper continues the downgrade by sharing the platform with not only those who teach a man-centered gospel, but with false teacher Beth Moore, and pro-Emergent teachers Francis Chan and Andy Stanley.

Downtown:Wednesday: 9:45am–noonBeth Moore: Stepping Up: A Journey • Through the Psalms of AscentTeachers: Linda LaFrombois 651-290-25157 Weeks: Jan 20–Mar 3 Cost: $20Just as songs and poems express feelings, Psalms 120–134 model how we can voice our petitions and praises to God. Explore the major feasts of Israel and journey through themes of joy, redemption, repentance, the power of blessings, facing ridicule, and more. Expect nothing less than intimacy with and worship of our great God!

NorthWednesday: 9:45am–noonBeth Moore: Breaking Free•Teacher: Cynthia Francis 651-415-958611 Weeks: Jan 20–Mar 31 Cost: $20All through Scripture we read about freedom in Christ. Join us as we explore this transforming power and discover how God intended for us to fully know and believe Him, glorify Him, experience His peace and enjoy His presence.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

St. Patrick's Day is coming soon and I'd like to once again share a good article on the real Patrick. Contrary to the Roman Catholic's claim, he was NOT Roman Cathoic, but rather a Baptist.

Here is an edited list why he was a Christian and a Baptist and not Roman Catholic (go to the link above for the full article):

Number One: St. Patrick Baptized Only Professed Believers

Contrary to Catholic dogma, which teaches that infants are to be "baptized", in all of Patrick's writings he does not mention one single incident when he baptized an infant, much less someone who had not professed Christ as their Saviour.

Number Two: St. Patrick Baptized By Immersion Only

This has been a leading principle among the Baptists since the days of the Apostles and still is today. Again, in all of his writings there is not one shred of evidence that the Irish preacher knew anything of sprinkling. All of the records of his baptisms tell of immersion.

Number Three: In Church Government

St. Patrick Was A Baptist During his ministry, Patrick is recorded to have "founded 365 churches and consecrated the same number of bishops, and ordained 3,000 presbyters (Ancient British and Irish Churches, William Cathcart, page 282).

Number Four: Patrick Was A Baptist In Independence From Creeds, Councils, Popes, etc.

Patrick never attended one council and recognized no authority over him, save that of the Lord Jesus Himself. There is not any evidence whatsoever that even remotely suggests that the famed Irish preacher acknowledged any man to be of superior authority, power or position than he. He recognized no Pope. He recognized no Cardinal. In all of his writings it cannot be found where one time he subscribes to even the most insignificant and remote catechism, creed, or dogma of the Roman Catholic system.

Number Five: In Doctrine

Patrick Was A Baptist In all of his writings, all of the doctrine that Patrick espouses adherence to is consistent with historic Baptist doctrine. The venerable preacher wrote, "It is Christ who gave His life for thee (and) is He who speaks to thee. He has poured out upon us abundantly the Holy Spirit, the gift and assurance of immortality, who causes men to believe and become obedient that they might be the sons of God and joint heirs with Christ." In this one statement, Patrick alludes to six (6) major Baptist doctrines:

a.Patrick believed in the substitutionary atonement of Christ.

He did not believe that salvation comes through catechism, communion, confession or christening. He believes what Baptists have always believed, that all are saved by the Grace of God, through faith in His Son, coming in repentance, and by His blood. William Cathcart wrote, "There is no ground for doubting but that he preached the gospel of repentance and faith in Ireland, and that his ministrations were attended by overwhelming success" (The Baptist Encyclopedia, page 887).

b. He believes in the free gift of the Holy Spirit which comes to the believer at the moment of salvation. He does not believe that the gift of the Holy Spirit is a separate work of grace, nor is He manifested by speaking in tongues (John 14:16).

c.He also firmly conveys the message of the eternal security of the believer in that those who are genuinely saved have put on immortality (II Timothy 1:10).

d.He confirms his belief that men must be drawn by God in order to be saved (John 6:44).

e.Patrick affirms his conviction in the sonship of the believer (John 1:12). He believes that while Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, every true believer in Christ is also a son.

f.And the great Irish theologian attests to the fact that all believers are joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:16-17). Patrick's doctrine is also recorded by his disciples. Comgall writes, "religion does not exist in bodily efforts..." Muirchu states that the ancient poet Dubthac was redeemed under the ministry of Patrick and that he "...first on that day believed in God and it was imputed to him for righteousness" No mention of baptism for salvation. No mention of a confessional. No mention of communion. Patrick taught his disciples well that salvation comes only by and through the grace of Almighty God.

Number Six: In Terms Of The Lord's Supper, Patrick Was A Baptist

From his writings we know that he rejected the Roman Catholic view of salvation in the ordinance. Also from his writings, we know that Patrick believed that the believer himself should partake of both elements of communion, the bread and the cup, and not just the administrator exclusively.

Number Seven: Patrick Rejects The Roman Catholic Dogma Of TransubstantiationPatrick believed that the elements were only pictures of Christ's body and Christ's blood. Dr. Jarrell wrote, "In all the descriptions of the Eucharist quoted there is no evidence that it is...", or literally becomes the flesh of Christ and His blood. The elements are merely symbols of such.

Number Eight: Patrick Never Affirmed His Belief In, Or Adherence To, Many Crucial Catholic Pecularities

St.Patrick was a Baptist and the first Irish churches were Baptist churches. He knew nothing of priestly confession and priestly forgiveness. He was not acquainted with extreme unction. He strictly forbade the worship of images. Never once did he instruct his converts that they were to pay homage to Mary or worship her. He never mentions the intercession of Mary or of any departed saint. In all of his writings there is no mention at all of purgatory, of indulgences, of keeping holy days, of praying to anyone but God Himself, of the persecution of opposers of the church, of distinguishing clerical garments, of the rosary, of last rites, of mass, of allegiance to the Pope. None of these crucial Catholic doctrines and dogmas were practiced by or even mentioned by the great missionary to Ireland.

I have mentioned the problem with Beth Moore in the past , but Ken Silva at Apprising Ministries points us to Chris Rosenbrough who recently dealt with Moore's inability to rightly handle Scripture, as is linked at Apprising Ministrieshere.

Downtown:Wednesday: 9:45am–noonBeth Moore: Stepping Up: A Journey • Through the Psalms of AscentTeachers: Linda LaFrombois 651-290-25157 Weeks: Jan 20–Mar 3 Cost: $20Just as songs and poems express feelings, Psalms 120–134 model how we can voice our petitions and praises to God. Explore the major feasts of Israel and journey through themes of joy, redemption, repentance, the power of blessings, facing ridicule, and more. Expect nothing less than intimacy with and worship of our great God!

NorthWednesday: 9:45am–noonBeth Moore: Breaking Free•Teacher: Cynthia Francis 651-415-958611 Weeks: Jan 20–Mar 31 Cost: $20All through Scripture we read about freedom in Christ. Join us as we explore this transforming power and discover how God intended for us to fully know and believe Him, glorify Him, experience His peace and enjoy His presence.

Wednesday, March 03, 2010

Besides Obama's actualbirth documentation,the still-concealed documentation for him includeskindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Another significant factor is the estimated $1.7 million Obama has spent on court cases to prevent any of the documentation of his life to be revealed to the public.

The "certification of live birth" posted online and widely touted as "Obama's birth certificate" does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same "short-form" document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true "long-form" birth certificate – which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician – is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.

Oddly, though congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a "natural born citizen," no controlling legal authority ever sought to verify Obama's claim to a Hawaiian birth.

Just a reminder of all the things Obama has not disclosed. If there's nothing ot hide, then why the secrecy? An above-board person would have no problem at all disclosing all this information. Others before him were required to do so without much arm-twisting. So what's going on? Or is he the ONLY one who is above all that?

Other candidates that have been removed because they did not fulfill the REQUIREMENTS of office: Eldridge Cleaver in California in 1968, and Thomas H. Moodie of N. Dakota in 1935.

Requirements aren't optional and an honest public man has no problem showing his background and what makes him "eligable" for any office. Obama is hiding from the light of day and there's a reason. I'm fairly certain that the Lord will reveal it all in due course.

Monday, March 01, 2010

Thanks to Christian Research Network for the heads up on this article. I have observed what Johnson describes firsthand myself. I believe the prevailing mentality of "truth is in everything" or "all truth is God's truth" is why there is an adaption of kinds of error and false teachers, and why professing "solid" Christians will not separate themselves completely from them.

Exercpts from The Neo-Liberal Stealth Offensive By Phil Johnson:

The gospel's most dangerous earthly adversaries are not raving atheists who stand outside the door shouting threats and insults. They are church leaders who cultivate a gentle, friendly, pious demeanor but hack away at the foundations of faith under the guise of keeping in step with a changing world.

No Christian should imagine that heresy is always conspicuous or that every purveyor of theological mischief will lay out his agenda in plain and honest terms. The enemy prefers to sow tares secretly, for obvious reasons. Thus Scripture expressly warns us to be on guard against false teachers who creep into the church unnoticed (Jude 4), wolves who sneak into the flock wearing sheep's clothing (Matt 7:15), and servants of Satan who disguise themselves as angels of light (2 Cor. 11:13-15).

Theological liberalism is particularly dependent on the stealth offensive. A spiritually healthy church is generally not susceptible to the arrogant skepticism that underlies a liberal's rejection of biblical authority.Liberalism must therefore take root covertly and gain strength and influence gradually. The success or failure of the whole liberal agenda hinges on a patient public-relations cam­paign.That is precisely how neo-liberals have managed to get a foothold in the contemporary evangelical movement.

They want the world's admiration at all costs.

....But one of the common characteristics of liberalism is an obsession with gaining the world's approval and admiration no matter the cost.We witnessed the germination of this attitude in the evangelical movement at least four decades ago, especially among contemporary church leaders who let neighborhood surveys and opinion polls determine the style and agenda of the church.

When churches give in to that craving for worldly approval, they inevitably subjugate the gospel to a more popular message.At first, they won't necessarily deny (or even challenge) core gospel truths such as the historical facts outlined in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. But they will abbreviate, modify, or add to the message. The embellishments usually echo whatever happens to be politically correct at the moment—climate change, world hunger, the AIDS crisis, or whatever. Those things will be stressed and talked about repeatedly while the historic facts of Christ's death and resurrection, the great themes of gospel doctrine, and the actual text of Scripture itself will be largely ignored or treated as something to be taken for granted.

Their "faith" comes with an air of intellectual superiority.

Liberals treat faith itself as an academic matter. Their whole system is essentially a wholesale rejection of simple, childlike belief. Their worldview foments an air of academic arrogance, setting human reason in the place of highest authority, treating the Bible with haughty condescension, and showing utter contempt for the kind of faith Christ blessed.

Consequently, liberals are and always have been obsessed with academic respectability. They want the world's esteem as scholars and intellectuals—no matter what they have to compromise to get it. They sometimes defend that motive by arguing that the secular academy's acceptance is essential to the Christian testimony.

They despise doctrinal and biblical precision.

This may sound like an oxymoron, but while treating faith as an academic matter, liberals prefer an almost anti-intellectual, agnostic approach to dealing with the specific truth-claims of Scripture. They like their doctrine hazy and indistinct.

One maneuver neo-liberals have perfected in these postmodern times is an artful dodge when they dislike a particular doctrine but cannot afford to make a plain and open denial. Instead, they will claim, "Scripture is simply too unclear on that point. We can't really be sure. The point is disputed by top scholars, and who are we to speak with too much certainty?"

Thus without denying (or affirming) anything in particular, and without even technically dismissing the matter under discussion as an unimportant point, the ruse effectively sets the truth aside. The skeptic's goal is thus accomplished without incurring any of the odium of skepticism.

Heavy doses of that flavor of postmodern, neo-liberal evasion have conditioned multitudes of church members to regard carefulness and precision in handling doctrine as both unimportant and potentially divisive. These days the person who shows evidence of doctrinal scruples is much more likely to be held in suspicion or disdain among evangelicals than the neo-liberals who have deliberately made the study of biblical doctrine seem so cloudy, confusing, and contentious.

"The case is mournful. Certain ministers are making infidels. Avowed atheists are not a tenth as dangerous as those preachers who scatter doubt and stab at faith." - Spurgeon in The Downgrade Contraversy

The main problem is that many religious leaders today say one thing and teach another. If you ask Gregory Boyd or the other “Open View of God” heretics if they believe in the “omniscience” of God, they will say, “Yes.” Dumb Christians are satisfied at this point and go their merry way deceived and hoodwinked. But if you force them to define the term “omniscience,” they end up denying that God knows all things! They claim that God does not and cannot know the future.

Just because someone says, “I believe in sola scriptura,” does not mean he really believes in it. If he elsewhere says that the Bible is not the final authority in faith and practice, he has denied in substance what he supposedly affirmed as a slogan. Heretics have always done this. What they affirm with the right hand is what they deny with the left hand. It does not matter what doctrine is at stake.

In the early 1980s, those who denied the inerrancy of Scripture did not begin by openly denying it. They redefined it until the term “inerrancy” meant errors!

Those who deny the bodily resurrection of Christ often pretend to believe in it by tricky words and double talk. Believe me; I have heard some slick theologians in my day!

Apostasy in Scripture is of two kinds: doctrinal and moral.

A heretic can be a good person who is very moral. Yet, he can also be an anti-Christ. The monk Pelagius was according to all a good man, morally speaking. Thus when I point out some teacher as a heretic, evanjellyfish usually respond, “But he is sooo nice! He is a good man. How dare you attack him!”

They assume that heretics are always mean and vile. A nice heretic who says that right phrases and theological clichés cannot be a heretic in their mind.

The problem with heretics who are “nice” is that we tend to let them get away with the most outrageous teaching because they seem to be so nice. End quote.

"If I can kind of give you a perspective on all of this, I'm sure Satan knew we Christian evangelicals would not buy the theology of liberalism so he sold us the hermeneutics. What do you mean by that? Satan knew we wouldn't buy their theology so he sold us their principles of interpretation so sooner or later we would arrive at their theology...a kind of Christianity where doctrine and conviction are scorned. You go into the typical town, find the pulpit where the man of God clearly and deeply and profoundly and faithfully articulates doctrine and I'll show you a small group of faithful folk. You find the church where they're hooping and hollering, dive and dancing and jumping and I'll show you a major crowd, in most cases. God's Word will never pass away but sadly it has been bypassed to allow for the new evangelical relativism. Preachers are comedians, story tellers and counselors but not powerful theological heralds and proclaimers of divine truth.

In fact, this is so serious it's gotten to the place where even at the basic issue of the gospel there's no conviction."

About Me

My name is Denise. I grew up in the Charismatic movement, but God delivered me out of it, and I thank Him for that. My heart is to show other believers the error of various movements(WOF, NAR, Seeker Friendly, Reformed theology/New Calvinism).I want to help them find truth through Scripture. I love the Word of God and hold it dear to my heart. It is the standard by which I filter everything, including doctrine & politics, including my own thoughts and actions. Ps 138:2
There is One God, and within the One God there are three distinct, co-equal and co-eternal persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit(1Peter 1:2; Matt. 28:19; Matt. 3:16-17; John 14:16-17). Literal 6 day Creation is Truth.Scripture is infallible, inerrant, & God-breathed (2Tim. 3:16, Heb.4:12, Ps. 19 & 119). Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone for the glory of God alone apart from any works (baptism, prayers, walking an aisle, etc.) so that no one can boast (Eph. 2:8-10). God is totally Sovereign in ALL things (Ps 33). I do mean ALL. Man is responsible for his sin. God is responsible for saving the elect through HIS means.